Search

This article analyses the coverage of the current US–China trade war in the Global Times. Some scholars argue that official nationalism, which stress the unity of the Chinese people, is challenged by popular nationalism, which privileges the dominant Han ethnicity, and that official nationalism is forced to make concessions to popular nationalism. If this is true, then one would expect to find evidence in the coverage of international issues in a 'popular' official newspaper like Global Times. The newspaper's coverage stresses negative features of the USA, but devotes considerable space to the damage that Trump's policies are doing to ordinary Americans. It does not present China as the unique victim of US economic aggression. The coverage stresses broad international agreement for free trade, leaving the USA isolated in adopting protectionist policies. At least in this instance, state-led nationalism remains central and no concessions are made to popular sentiments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since China implemented animation control policies in 2004, foreign animation programmes have almost disappeared from Chinese television. At the same time, the Chinese government has invested enormous amounts of money in developing the animation industry as a creative industry. A questionnaire survey was conducted to explore how the Chinese audience views domestic and foreign animation programmes. The results indicate that pirated Japanese animation is widely viewed via the Internet by adolescents; on the other hand, domestic animation is popular only among children. Preferences for domestic animation correlate positively with age and patriotism but negatively with Internet use, while preferences for Japanese animation correlate negatively with age and patriotism but positively with Internet use. These results show that nationalistic sentiments are associated with preferences for either domestic or foreign animation programmes. However, preferences for Japanese animation are not significantly associated with anti-government attitudes. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Typologies are widely used in the field of intercultural communication to explain cultural differences. Especially the typology ‘individualism versus collectivism’ (I/C) is a central theoretical construct in cross-cultural comparison. But are such typologies really suited for explaining cultural phenomena? Is their explanatory power limited because the theoretical underpinnings are based on a Western mindset? And is using typologies as scientific models appropriate to explain intercultural incidents and uncover cultural patterns from a non-Western view as well? Do such typologies meet the demands of a modern view on the field of intercultural communication? This article casts a critical light on the appropriateness and applicability of typologies. The aim is twofold. The first part examines the limitations of typologies from an East Asian standpoint, bringing out the hidden cultural mindset on which this bipolar construct is built. The second part presents a model meant to contribute to a more profound debate between East Asian and Western views on intercultural communication. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]